This book, Beyond the Blue Gate, was authored by Teo Soh Lung about her experiences of being detained by the ISA back in 1987 under Operation Spectrum, accused to be Marxists planning to “subvert” the government of Singapore. She was but one of the 22 who were interrogated, tortured, threatened, and ultimately forced to give a confession, and their accusations by the government were reported obediently as fact by the media. It was only after more than two decades that this book of experiences was published, as the political climate before then was extremely unreceptive to them.
I remember attending the book launch back in June of 2010 at The Legends Hotel at Fort Canning, and remember seeing a few prominent civil society figures there, but most significantly, waiting patiently after the launch to ask for an autograph by the author herself. I was just 16 then. To be honest, it has been in the cupboard ever since, with me giving the excuse of having “no time” to not read these books. Until now. This was one of the few books I’ve brought in with me during these 2.5 weeks of confinement.
The message Soh Lung wrote for me in the photo was flattering but completely undeserved. I have but a fraction of the bravery of the ones who were detained, having hardly enough courage to go through the first 2 days of NS without feeling utterly helpless in the process. I’ve known early on how unjust and cruel the government was in imprisoning these detainees who did nothing wrong, but I never understood as deeply as I do now on a personal level, when I started reading the book, what it meant to live like that for 2 years of your life (without things like weekly book-outs, of course). And I know I will even more as I continue reading this book for the rest of my confinement period.
To Soh Lung Teo, Vincent Cheng, Tan Tee Seng, and all the other ISA detainees, we owe you an immense dept of gratitude that society hasn’t, and yet, can never repay. You are the true brave ones, and even though not everyone may know of what you’ve been through yet, to those who do, you inspire hope and courage in us to continue the fight for justice in society. Truly, we are standing on the shoulders of giants.

When I do though, it’s usually of things I feel and care deeply about. This is probably one of the things that I feel most deeply about, and am most conflicted about.

One of the sayings that recently shaped how I looked at the world was probably this by someone I respect.

“I take 2 weeks to come up with a good answer.”

The issues of today are usually met with knee-jerk reactions from most parts of society, whatever views they may be. People are quick to form opinions and cast judgements to feed their ego, without spending the time to sift through the details and get close as possible to the truth of the matter. I think the quote above shows a side of humility that is rarely shown in society today. An admission that we might not always be correct at the first brush, and a willingness to put away any expectations or personal bias that we are often burdened with, and with a sincerity in wanting to find out the genuine truth of the matter.

I used to be rather impulsive, and can still be, but the above saying really assured me that it’s OK to not know the answer to everything all the time, and to patiently ponder on the difficult questions in life, rather than urgently coming up with answers. The journey of life, is in itself, the reward.

I have been pondering this issue for many, many months, gone through many self-reflections and sleepless nights. I’ve been pondering also on whether I should write this post, and how I should write it to best reflect how I feel.

National Service. A compulsory rite of passage of about 2 years that every Singaporean male must go through after finishing their pre-university studies. I am enlisting on the 12th of August, and have never felt more strongly against it.

I can’t even begin to list down the many number of reasons of why I am so against it, but it boils down to the fundamental issues of individual liberty and rights. I am against National Service because, it, being compulsory, denies us any choice to make about entering it, and that the organisation, as I know it, works by ensuring that all sense of freedom of thought and individuality is quashed and replaced with subservience to authority. In a sense, it’s akin to slavery.

Oh, but being a slave is certainly much worse than being in National Service! Slavery, as we think of it, doesn’t permit National Servicemen to return home every week, doesn’t give them the privilege of using their smartphones in camp and certainly doesn’t have the many facilities and privileges that National Service provides!

What I’m referring to, however, is the slavery of the mind. We train unthinking soldiers to accomplish only the tasks they were ordered to perform, because that’s how the army works most efficiently in times of war: to carry out orders quickly and swiftly as a team. If they don’t, punishments and humiliation will almost certainly ensure that. But it cannot be mentally healthy to these young individuals and eventually, society, to be brought up in this manner. The 2 years in the army doesn’t just impede their growth because of the actual time period of 2 years spent in the army, it impedes their growth because of what the army does to their minds.

There are those, many of whom I know, who take pride in serving the army and our nation. To them it is an immense honour and a worthy sacrifice in defending this small island state that barely made it out alive 50 years ago. I respect and admire their conviction and share their sentiment in wanting to do what’s best for this place we call home. I understand, too, the need and responsibility of every one of us to do our part in protecting our nation. This country, 50 years ago, needed a strong and committed army not just to defend our nation, but to provide that sense of hope and security to citizens who lived in fear and uncertainty everyday, and we owe them our immense gratitude. 50 years later, our army has more than successfully completed that task, projecting a strong and independent Singapore that we all can be proud of.

But circumstances change. The army hasn’t evolved enough to care more about our young people’s hopes and aspirations, and hasn’t been part of the larger change from a society that does what it’s being told to a society that does what is right because it is right. The army needs to evolve to accommodate a larger spectrum of views, such as religious ones like Jehovah’s Witnesses who don’t believe in carrying arms and are therefore forced to detention barracks. Malay muslims who are distrusted and aren’t treated equally just because they are thought to have their loyalties elsewhere should we go to war with our predominantly muslim neighbours. Countless of other peoples whose liberties were not respected but we don’t yet fully know about because of the immense secrecy, and the power and control of information that the army holds over its soldiers. And its inability to tolerate people speaking truth to its power shows how disconnected it is from the rest of society that is moving, slowly but surely, toward openness.

How then should the army be like? Do I propose a professional army that is not conscripted and so doesn’t consist of everyone? Don’t I know that Singapore has a small population and can’t afford a professional army? Who is going to defend Singapore, if not I?

To be honest, I don’t have all the answers, and I don’t pretend to know. What I do know, however, is that we cannot continue to use the reason of defending our country to discredit and silence concerns about the way it is being run and about the way it should treat its soldiers. The army, after all, is here to defend us from the oppression of our invaders, not oppress us. An organisation which prioritises our defence at the expense of other equally important priorities such as our liberties is not something I can support with a clear conscience.

There are people who will question my intentions in writing this, that I am selfish and want to be exempted from serving, or that I crave attention, but believe me, I’d rather not have such attention. I admit to my selfishness in not doing more other than just speaking my mind on this blog, as I haven’t had much support on this issue amongst those I know. But I know that if I do not express how I feel, which is about the least I could do, then I would not be able to answer to my conscience. And my conscience is just about the only thing that is keeping me from just following the advice of countless of friends to just “tahan” and be done with the two years.

I pray for wisdom and understanding. Oh and happy 50th, Singapore.

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2015/08/11/thoughts-on-national-service/feed/1vipersonickennethUphttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/up/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/up/#respondSat, 11 Jan 2014 17:13:52 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/?p=120]]>I got to watch one of my favourite animated films of all time again today on the Disney Channel.

There are two scenes which especially stood out for me ~

This scene is simply beautiful. It’s amazing how without any dialogue at all, just the same progression of notes and chords can produce emotions ranging from the happy and joyful to the sad and pitiful. It’s probably the combination of rhythm, dynamics, the leaving out of certain notes in a chord to make it sound less full and conveying that sense of emptiness in Carl’s heart when his wife is gone, and definitely a lot of emotion and care by the animators themselves that produced this truly wonderful work of art. It really is one of my favourite scenes of all time and just further proves that the genius artists at Pixar are producing insanely great work, and that Steve would have been immensely proud of them. He was very, actually. The track, which they repeatedly play and remix accordingly throughout the film, is called MarriedLife.

The next scene is no less beautiful, showing photographs and memories of the times Carl and Ellie shared, but all the more revealing and insightful even, containing many life lessons to be learnt. At this point of time, Carl has achieved what he set out to do from the very beginning – to travel to and have his home situated right next to Paradise Falls. However, he doesn’t feel satisfied, not as satisfied as he felt he would be. Truth is, when he flips through the book of memories with Ellie, his late wife, he realises that getting to Paradise Falls didn’t matter that much after all. It wasn’t the end that actually mattered; what he really treasured and enjoyed were the daily adventures with Ellie, be it saving up for their trip to Paradise Falls, or ending up using those savings instead to repair a roof or replace a flat tyre. The journey, it turns out, was the reward. Not the end. Life isn’t always about getting to the end. And that journey ended when Ellie passed away, and the house is, as Carl puts it, is ‘just a house’. It didn’t matter anymore whether the house managed to end up situated beside Paradise Falls, as the true reward was the journey through life with Ellie. And that’s the way life is, so we might as well enjoy the ride.

I’ve been reminded recently how fragile life is, and it’s a real reminder to how we all live our life. We take things, people, for granted, we worry about tomorrow, the future, and we regret. We don’t live in the present, we take each passing moment with friends and people as part of the usual routine, and we complain and grumble about daily grievances, such as school or work. We should really be giving thanks for all that we have, every friend that we know and love, people we meet and pass on the street, the music we hear passing by street buskers, the morning sun and air we sometimes forget to notice, and just about every passing moment of our precious lives. Maybe that’s why I’m trying to focus more on the arts now, as the arts is really the thing that requires all of your senses and emotions, and is when your mind is the most resonant with what your senses are feeding it, and hence, when you are fully alive.

I’ve been reading a Bible reading plan for the past week or so entitled ‘Toward a Fearless New Year’, and one day’s message really spoke to me on how we should be thinking about fear and anxiety.

Nine Promises for Battling Anxiety

1. When I am anxious about some risky new venture or meeting, I battle unbelief with the promise: “Fear not for I am with you, be not dismayed for I am your God; I will help you, I will strengthen you, I will uphold you with my victorious right hand” (Isaiah 41:10).

2. When I am anxious about my ministry being useless and empty, I fight unbelief with the promise, “So shall my word that goes forth from my mouth; it will not come back to me empty but accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it” (Isaiah 55:11).

3. When I am anxious about being too weak to do my work, I battle unbelief with the promise of Christ, “My grace is sufficient for you, my power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:9), and “As your days so shall your strength be” (Deuteronomy 33:25).

4. When I am anxious about decisions I have to make about the future, I battle unbelief with the promise, “I will instruct you and teach you the way you should go; I will counsel you with my eye upon you” (Psalm 32:8).

5. When I am anxious about facing opponents, I battle unbelief with the promise, “If God is for us who can be against us!” (Romans 8:31).

6. When I am anxious about being sick, I battle unbelief with the promise that “tribulation works patience, and patience approved-ness, and approved-ness hope, and hope does not make us ashamed” (Romans 5:3–5).

7. When I am anxious about getting old, I battle unbelief with the promise, “Even to your old age I am he, and to gray hairs I will carry you. I have made, and I will bear; I will carry and will save” (Isaiah 46:4).

8. When I am anxious about dying, I battle unbelief with the promise that “none of us lives to himself and none of us dies to himself; if we live we live to the Lord and if we die we die to the Lord. So whether we live or die we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and rose again: that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living” (Romans 14:8–9).

9. When I am anxious that I may make shipwreck of faith and fall away from God, I battle unbelief with the promise, “He who began a good work in you will complete it unto the day of Christ” (Philippians 1:6). “He who calls you is faithful. He will do it” (1 Thessalonians 5:23). “He is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Hebrews 7:25).

Knowing all these just keeps me feeling relieved and blessed, and determined to make the new year count, not by any external expectations or rewards, but by truly living and being thankful for all I have, and just enjoying the ride, for that in itself is its true reward.

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/up/feed/0vipersonickennethThe journey is the rewardDear Mr Balakrishnanhttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/dear-mr-balakrishnan-3/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/dear-mr-balakrishnan-3/#respondWed, 06 Jun 2012 13:45:28 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/dear-mr-balakrishnan-3/]]>This is a from-the-heart response to a status update posted by Vivian Balakrishnan on his Facebook page.

I am touched by your statement on how Dr Lim Hock Siew inspired and influenced you to join politics, as well as your cordial friendship with him over the past 24 years. Lim Hock Siew was a good and honourable man. But more than that, he was a patriot. A patriot who never wavered in his belief that all men should be treated fair and equal. For his peaceful activities, however, he was incarcerated for over 20 years, missing out the prime of his life and the times he could have spent with his growing son and wife.

Agreeing to disagree is gracious behaviour expected in a democracy. Yet, one thing we must all defend in a democracy is another person’s entitlement to his or her rights, even if we strongly disagreed with them. Dr Lim’s sacrifices were not brought upon him through any fault of his own. Rather, they were brought about through the abuses of the ISA, which, decade after decade in Singapore’s history, has been used to silence and intimidate political opponents and dissent.

Even after all he’s been through, he was still willing to forgive his oppressors and had no feeling of bitterness to them. I can especially relate to this, as a Christian, as Jesus has taught us to “love your enemies”. Indeed, here was a good and honourable man worthy of our respect. But merely singing Dr Lim’s praises is not enough; Dr Lim wouldn’t have wanted this. We must, sooner than later, address the issue of the injustices caused by a law which has no place in a just and equal society. We must not be silent on this grave issue, as to do so would only affirm that Dr Lim deserved all that he went through. Regardless of whether we are in the ruling party or opposition, this is an issue which we all have to stand united on. For it isn’t about partisanship or the disagreement of policies anymore, this has to do with our very own morality.

Last Saturday, I attended an event at Speakers’ Corner calling for the abolishment of the ISA. Dr Lim Hock Siew wasn’t the only one unjustly incarcerated, plenty of others were, too. We, as sons of this country, all have a part to play in reconciling these detainees and removing the ISA, so that we may yet dream again of a more caring and just society which respects the dignity and rights of every person for future generations to come. Thank you and God bless you.

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/dear-mr-balakrishnan-3/feed/0vipersonickennethImageAdaptation in the PAP’s style of politicshttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/adaptation-in-the-paps-style-of-politics/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/adaptation-in-the-paps-style-of-politics/#respondTue, 28 Feb 2012 05:27:15 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/?p=93]]>In many areas of society, adaptability can be seen as an ability to change something or oneself to fit to occurring changes. This can be said as well for governance in autocratic countries, and in particular, the PAP’s style of governance. Over the past 50 years of its rule in Singapore, the PAP government, and the man at its helm, Lee Kuan Yew, ruled Singapore with an iron fist in order to implement the hard-hitting and unpopular policies that they claim are best for Singapore. To easily implement such policies without opposition, the PAP government has had to eliminate and silence dissent, but how they have done so over the course of 5 decades has changed a lot, as the changing times require that they mellow in or be toppled over by their very own citizens, which history has proved time and time again to be true. Indeed, the style of governance in the past 50 years have changed, I believe, all for the betterment of a Singapore which can join the ranks of nations that respect each and every citizen as a person with rights, instead of just mere economic digits.

Firstly, when the PAP was in opposition, and Lee Kuan Yew the opposition leader, Lee said these bold words to the then Chief minister, David Marshall: “If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law – if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states – then what is it?” Barely 7 years later, in 1963, he launched a nation-wide crackdown and detained hundreds of his most-feared political adversaries and trade unionists – labeling them communists- under Operation Coldstore. As these men were detained under the Internal Security Act, till this date, they have yet to be given a chance to defend themselves in court, let alone been proved to be communists. In fact, many authors who read the British’s declassified files on Singapore have noted that there is no evidence that they have been communists at all, and concluded that this is merely political rape as seen during the beginnings of many authoritarian countries around the world.

Thus began the start of authoritarian Singapore, where roughly every ten years or so would see the removal of a prominent group or person who aired dissenting views. As the chinese saying goes, “Killing a chicken to scare the monkey”, such were the purposes of the measures taken, to remind the citizenry that the same would befall of anyone who tried to go against the system. In the 70s, the PAP made such an example of student activist, Tan Wah Piow of NUS, who they claim were “inciting riots”, thus jailing him for eight months. Fearing for his safety, he fled to the UK after his release and sought political asylum. In the 80s, just when Singapore’s civil society was starting to grow and give promise, Operation Spectrum saw the detainment of 22 young professionals and activists accused of being Marxists trying to overthrow the government through the use of force. Such detainments and fear-mongering tactics, however, had already begun to be harder to justify by the 80s, as a young, educated generation brought about by the economic success of the government had begun to question more fervently the government’s legitimacy. From then on, the PAP has had to use more subtle ways to systematically remove dissent.

Defamation suits were waged against prominent opposition figures such as JB Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan by Singapore’s leaders, eventually bankrupting both of them and causing others to flee, thereby obstructing the progress of democracy in Singapore. But even these relatively subtle tactics proved to be too much to swallow for another new generation, who are well educated and globally informed by the internet. In particular, Facebook and Twitter helped to propel the progress of freedom of information and the alternative media even further, leaving the control of the press and traditional media in Singapore nearly useless to those who depended on the internet for news instead. Even libel suits against the opposition were considered to be too harsh and authoritarian, and the government had to take an even more open stance to criticism, as evidenced by the watershed 2011 GE, where not a single defamation suit was filed against anyone, and even our PM had to apologise for his mistakes to defuse some of the public pressure his party is facing. Contrast this to the 2006 elections, when our PM openly proclaimed in front of a lunch-time crowd that he needed to “fix” the opposition and buy his supporters over should the opposition take power.

Through the gradual adaptation of the style of governance by the PAP government, Singapore has over the years become a more vibrant and creative society. To be sure, the adaptation of the style of the PAP and our progress towards becoming a genuine democracy is a relatively slow one – the other three Asian tigers, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea, have become full democracies decades ago and have long overtaken Singapore in respecting the civil liberties of their people – but, steps forward, no matter how small, are still progress. As Lao Tsu said, “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” The adaptations the PAP government has had to make were not willing nor was it intended at all from the beginning, they were forced by the winds of change, winds which were blown time and time again by those who yearn for justice and freedom, winds which they could not continue to withstand with the previous autocratic methods of governing. And so, this inevitable adaptation the PAP has to make can only be good not just for Singapore and her people, but for the PAP as well. Just like how the KuoMingTang of Taiwan has slowly become a legitimate party by stripping off their old and autocratic ways, we look forward to the day when the PAP can become a legitimate party contributing to the vibrant political scene in Singapore.

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/adaptation-in-the-paps-style-of-politics/feed/0vipersonickenneth20120228-132544.jpg_57889691_013704542-1Some (Much needed) updateshttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/some-much-needed-updates/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/some-much-needed-updates/#respondMon, 28 Feb 2011 16:24:18 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/some-much-needed-updates/]]>Ok, firstly, I’ve just finished February Choir Camp. Planning was very last-minute, as I’ve said during the debrief today, because of my underestimation of the amount of planning needed for the entire camp. Also because of the busy previous week preparing for Common Test One. Planning was done in class, during Recess, after school, and lastly, throughout the night to as late as 4am during camp itself. Therefore, I’ve gotten only 5 hours of sleep in the two days of camp. Extremely tired, but still had to do my own admin and homework, the day camp ended was spent very much at the computer, and I only slept for 9 hours that night, hardly enough to make up for the loss of 11 hours of sleep during the camp. This was the same for Sunday night, causing me to wake up late for school today. Strangely, I seem to have not learnt from my mistake, and am doing the exact same thing as I did the day before.

However, I felt that the planning for the camp was really satisfying, having come up with the various games. In a way, it feels kind of good to be this busy as I know that I’m not rotting my life away, and I generally feel more productive.

So wordy my sentences have been, yes? I have been feeling very much like that these few days, God knows why. Maybe I’m just feeling debate-ish. (Did I just sounded Sim Christopher-ish?)

Words, words, words. In other related news, my entire class has failed the English Common Test. I really do doubt my teacher’s ability to properly convey the “proper” method of answering questions, as none of us seemed to have gotten it. I put inverted commas because I believe the method of answering questions required by the teacher isn’t really the only correct way. What may be proper to one person may not be to another, and the difference really is quite noticeable, in the area of the way she asks us to answer a question and how modern society does it. In other words, the teaching is fundamentally flawed.

—————————————————————————————————————–

In the second half of this post, I will try to be as wordy-less as possible.

I bought my Macbook Pro 15-inch last year in early September, and expected it to be perceived as new to me at least until April this year, a good 8 months. But recently, I got this shit in my inbox –

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/some-much-needed-updates/feed/0vipersonickennethNewMBPfuuuuuuMy Thoughts on the Violence in Thailandhttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/my-thoughts-on-the-violence-in-thailand/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/my-thoughts-on-the-violence-in-thailand/#respondMon, 17 May 2010 14:44:55 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/my-thoughts-on-the-violence-in-thailand]]>

Violence is never the solution to our problems. History has shown time and again that using violence against oppression, however unjustified, always eventually fails.

One such example would be the infamous Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. Noble as their cause may be, that is, to end discrimination against the Tamils in Sri Lanka, they have, out of frustration and anger, turned from practicing peaceful negotiations to resorting to violence as the only way to solve their problems. What happened in the end, of course, proved all their efforts to be fruitless. After over 30 years of senseless fighting, the militant group Tamil Tigers were defeated and their leader shot. A new Tamil Tigers emerged, but this time in the form of a democratic political party.

In the case in Thailand, both parties, the government and the protesters, are in the wrong. The protesters have resorted to violence and riots, while the government used the army to further suppress them. As Martin Luther King, Jr. once famously said,

"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."

We, the people fighting for freedom in Singapore, must be careful never to lower ourselves to the standards that our oppressors live by, otherwise we will be no different from them. Only through Love and Non-violence can we achieve our goal of freedom in Singapore.

"38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."

Matthew 5:38-48 (New King James Version)

]]>https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/my-thoughts-on-the-violence-in-thailand/feed/0vipersonickennethUpdate: Petition has been sent but no replyhttps://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/update-petition-has-been-sent-but-no-reply/
https://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/update-petition-has-been-sent-but-no-reply/#respondSun, 25 Apr 2010 10:23:29 +0000http://vipersonickenneth.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/update-petition-has-been-sent-but-no-reply]]>

The petition asking Lee Kuan Yew to apologise for his disparaging remarks against Singaporeans has been sent through email to the MPs since 27/3, and as a letter to the Prime Minister’s Office, Istana and Lee Kuan Yew’s Residence since sometime last week. As of today, 25/4, there has been no reply by any MP on this matter. Below is an image of the petition in .pdf format as well the letter before sending.

The following is an essay I did in English class. The teacher asked me to print it out and since I’ve already typed it, I thought it would be practical to post it here since I haven’t updated my blog in ages. Also, it is based on an exaggerated true story.

–

A Student strolled through the shops at the Toa Payoh HDB Hub, looking for a new mobile phone. He had in mind the latest mobile phone, with a touch screen and all the latest technologies embedded into it, and he was determined to get it today. After all, he had been without a phone for almost a week now as his old phone was beyond repair and he had worked hard at his job during the holidays to earn enough for it. “I deserve it,” he reasoned to himself.

He passed by each phone shop with glee, checking and comparing the prices to get the best deal. As he passed by a convenience stall, he noticed many bundles of cardboard stacked against each other at the corridor just outside the stall. “Strange,” he thought to himself. “They should have thrown these next to the rubbish container. Don’t they know that it’s obstructing the way?” He got closer to the numerous stacks of cardboard and noticed that an old and frail lady was sitting among them with her hands hugging her legs, as if it was snowing all around her. “What is she doing sitting among all the cardboards? And why does she look so sad?” the boy wondered. He then noticed a man, supposedly from the convenience stall, cutting cardboard into flat layers and bundling them up, placing them next to the other cardboards.

His heart sank as he finally realised what was going on. This woman was homeless, and had to collect cardboard in order to make a living. This convenience stall was donating some of its spare cardboard to her. Now the boy, who initially wanted to purchase the latest mobile phone, was struck with overwhelming guilt. How could he continue buying the phone he wanted so badly after observing the suffering of a homeless person? How could he, like the passers-by who walked past the old woman, be so blind as to pretend not to see her? He was struggling to make a decision as he stood next to the lady, staring blankly at her.

At last, his conscience got the better of him. He resorted to settle for a lower-end phone in order to give fifty-dollars to this old woman whom he had never met before. As he handed her the money, fresh from his wallet, the old lady looked up with tears in her eyes. She politely declined, but the boy, who had already made up his mind, smiled and insisted that she take it. He left almost immediately, overwhelmed with tears he could not hold back.

Kenneth Lin, 4N1

You go down New York, Broadway. You will see the beggars, people of the streets… Where are the beggars in Singapore? Show me. (2007)

I had no illusions about the independence of the local media when I first started my job in StraitsTimes, under SPH.

I knew that my work would be edited, and possibly censored for political safety, and I was mostly fine with that – no media channel anywhere in the world is entirely free from some form of editorial trimming, after all. But there is such a thing as a free press but certainly not one in Singapore.

What I didn’t bargain for was individual self-censorship, unspoken policies and rules, and the stoutness with which people swallowed their journalistic dignity and integrity (because it does exist, even strongly, in some places) to toe the company line. Incredible as it seems, reporters in Singapore do have the same fierce pride in their work as reporters anywhere else; only pitifully and sadly they cannot demonstrate their beliefs. After all its a job.The omnipotence of the CPF.

Its on the cards that there will be a general election in 2010. It’s hard for me to swallow the indignation I feel whenever I see the local media doggedly ignoring its news sense. We have seen it all before. We will see it again. And again. We see it every day.

Articles and TV programmes are edited to balance out pro-opposition views; awesome camera opportunities – like the opposition rallies – are studiously left out of media coverage; banal and unfair quotes and tactics are highlighted and headlined simply because they are tools of the ruling party and the lap-dog media will comply. But the truth will out. The voting public are not as blind as they seem. For those that WILL get the chance to vote, that is.

There are many things journalists see that the eyes of the public are not privy to, and that we would like to report on but can’t. Please remember that when you read an article or watch a broadcast that seems particularly, emetically subjective.

And help spread the word that a lot of us in the media are sorry that we can’t do the job we want to. It may not mean a lot to you, but it sucks for us that for every day, people’s opinions of us plummet – despite the fact that we work our asses off in 14-hour days with no breaks on weekends or public holidays to bring you OUR (or it THEIR) version of the news. We are just doing a job..for THEM.

And for those who think it’s as easy as quitting your jobs and following your conscience – grow up. This is a job. It puts food on our tables. We can all get up and leave, but it’s ridiculously easy to replace us with more party-line-spouting drones. And it’s also likely that we’re doing something about it, in our own little ways, even if it’s as small as writing about and expressing our dissatisfaction with the system from the inside. But we cant tell you about it.

After all, walls have ears inside here too. And some of those ears are positioned to hear everything, sometimes for some who want to just get on with company at the expense of dobbing their own friends. But that is another sad story.

Clearly the pressure coming from the head is overwhelming, and it is no surprise whatsoever that that pressure should translate down the chain, so that the executives chastise the editors, the editors chastise the journalists, and so on, if anyone steps out of line, and that perpetuates self-censorship because ‘you might as well mutilate your own article before they get to it, and in any case there’s no point in drawing attention to yourself’.